EVEN MORE:
looks like fraud to me (at a minimum) §
according to Peter, it's "bait and switch" §
that's why I put it in quotations...
... I can certainly see Peter's point (as a concept); if intent can be shown, wouldn't the "donors" be defrauded? (they were made to believe they were helping a non-profit and in fact ended up financing a *for profit*?)
MORE: this could turn out to be pretty interesting -- let's hope it stays on topic and does not degenerate in who knows what... D.
....
would this be legal? < dperiod > 02/13 21:07:55
hi, I'm trying to figure out if this would be legal.looks like fraud to me (at a minimum) §
according to Peter, it's "bait and switch" §
that's why I put it in quotations...
... I can certainly see Peter's point (as a concept); if intent can be shown, wouldn't the "donors" be defrauded? (they were made to believe they were helping a non-profit and in fact ended up financing a *for profit*?)
MORE: this could turn out to be pretty interesting -- let's hope it stays on topic and does not degenerate in who knows what... D.
....
would this be legal? < dperiod > 02/13 21:07:55
Peter: "The secret to Craig's community-building exercise was the following: in the late 90's he realized nobody would be too excited to help promote a service by a corporation. So he registered 2 companies - one non-profit and the other one for-profit.
When he expanded out of his SF base - specifically to NYC, he approached a variety of local groups and organization through his non-profit arm, selling the idea of a community web site and ask for their support in promoting it. He did not say anything about the other entity. When the traffic started flowing, a couple of years later, the "other" craigslist stepped in [and] cashed in."
Delia
P.S. let's set aside whether or not it actually happened (I'm just looking at whether or not it would be legal); thanks! D.
No comments:
Post a Comment